A unique feature of each of the IN six Scorpene SSKs is an on-board tactical situational awareness display console of the kind normally found on SSNs, SSGNs and SSBNs.

On this single console, the SSK’s Commanding Officer can view overlaid electronic navigation charts, the tactical situation picture, as well as a THALES-provided track table interface to the US Naval Research Laboratory-developed display and analysis tool set, called SIMDIS.

The SIMDIS is a set of COTS software tools in use to support 2-D and 3-D analysis and visualization of the undersea battlefield. SIMDIS allows an integrated real-time view of both time-space position information (TSPI) and telemetry data, and it also provides an intuitive view of complex system interactions before, during and after an event.

The defence ministry has issued a secret Request for Information (RFI) to global torpedo firms, for supplying over 100 heavyweight torpedoes for the Indian Navy’s Scorpene submarines, the first of which – INSKalvari – was commissioned on Thursday.
Prospective vendors are unwilling to speak, since they have signed a non-disclosure agreement. However three sources in the defence ministry and industry have verified this development.
While the torpedo RFI was issued in August and replies received in November from at least three global “original equipment manufacturers” (OEMs), a long wait lies ahead before the new torpedoes become available to arm the Kalvari and five more submarines that will follow it into service. The defence ministry’s Defence Procurement Procedure of 2016 allows 114 weeks (two years and three months) for concluding a contract, in practice an over-ambitious target. After the contract, manufacture and delivery would take another 2-3 years.
Until then, the navy’s six Kalvari-class boats (as the navy refers to submarines) will share 64 obsolescent SUT torpedoes with four HDW Shishumar-class vessels. This is woefully inadequate if the submarine fleet has to fight a war.
Further, there are question marks over the efficacy of the SUT torpedo, even though German OEM, Atlas Elektronik, was contracted in July 2013 to upgrade 64 SUT torpedoes and extend their service life by 15 years.
Business Standard learns the navy’s new torpedo RFI went out to 5-6 torpedo OEMs, but will boil down to a contest between French OEM, Naval Group, which is offering its F-21 torpedo; and German firm, Atlas Elektronik, with its Seahake Mod 4. It is understood that Russian and Japanese OEMs and Swedish company, Saab, were also sent RFIs. However, the Japanese did not respond; the Russian torpedo does not meet the Indian Navy’s specifications; nor does Saab’s, which is driven by a combustion engine while the navy wants an electrically driven torpedo.
The heavyweight torpedo is a submarine’s weapon of choice for sinking warships and submarines, which it typically engages from 50-100 kilometres away. Fired from a torpedo tube, it is driven through the water by a motor powered by electric batteries. It is guided towards the target by signals conveyed through a wire that unspools behind it. Approaching the target, the torpedo switches to “active guidance” using on-board sonar. When it slams into the target, an explosive charge detonates, creating an underwater hole that often causes catastrophic flooding, sinking the target vessel.
Besides torpedoes, submarines also carry anti-ship missiles (ASMs) like the Kalvari’s SM39 Exocet missile. ASMs are fired through the same tubes as torpedoes, and they emerge from the water and fly, skimming the sea, towards their target. But ASMs can be intercepted, and they are less lethal since they strike above the waterline.
The navy’s torpedo deficit has arisen due to the blacklisting of Italian conglomerate Finmeccanica, after allegations emerged in 2012 of bribery in the sale of twelve AW-101 helicopters to India by a Finmeccanica subsidiary, AgustaWestland. The defence ministry, on August 26, 2014, banned all new contracts with Finmeccanica group companies, including WASS, which had been chosen to supply 98 Black Shark torpedoes to India for the Scorpene fleet.
Global torpedo manufacturers believe India could be their largest customer. Although the current procurement is for only 100-plus torpedoes, industry experts say the navy actually requires 400-600 torpedoes. These are needed to arm six Scorpenes currently being rolled out, six Project 75-I submarines that are on the anvil, and a planned fleet of up to ten nuclear submarines.
With the cost of a heavyweight torpedo hovering around $2-3 million apiece, that represents a business opportunity of $800 million to $1.8 billion – a mouth-watering prospect for torpedo makers.
If the cost of the torpedoes the navy is currently buying tops Rs 2,000 crore ($311 million), the OEM will incur a 30 per cent offset liability. This would involve ploughing back 30 per cent of the contract value into Indian defence production. Since each torpedo costs an estimated $2-3 million, a 100-plus-torpedo order would be on the offset threshold.
Industry sources say buying torpedoes piecemeal – initially for the Kalvari-class, then for Project 75-I, and separately for the nuclear boats – would disadvantage India. Instead, a single order that combines India’s torpedo requirements would result in cheaper prices through economies of scale; and also create a compelling industrial logic for transferring torpedo production to India.

The defence ministry has issued a secret Request for Information (RFI) to global torpedo firms, for supplying over 100 heavyweight torpedoes for the Indian Navy’s Scorpene submarines, the first of which – INSKalvari – was commissioned on Thursday.
Prospective vendors are unwilling to speak, since they have signed a non-disclosure agreement. However three sources in the defence ministry and industry have verified this development.
While the torpedo RFI was issued in August and replies received in November from at least three global “original equipment manufacturers” (OEMs), a long wait lies ahead before the new torpedoes become available to arm the Kalvari and five more submarines that will follow it into service. The defence ministry’s Defence Procurement Procedure of 2016 allows 114 weeks (two years and three months) for concluding a contract, in practice an over-ambitious target. After the contract, manufacture and delivery would take another 2-3 years.
Until then, the navy’s six Kalvari-class boats (as the navy refers to submarines) will share 64 obsolescent SUT torpedoes with four HDW Shishumar-class vessels. This is woefully inadequate if the submarine fleet has to fight a war.
Further, there are question marks over the efficacy of the SUT torpedo, even though German OEM, Atlas Elektronik, was contracted in July 2013 to upgrade 64 SUT torpedoes and extend their service life by 15 years.
Business Standard learns the navy’s new torpedo RFI went out to 5-6 torpedo OEMs, but will boil down to a contest between French OEM, Naval Group, which is offering its F-21 torpedo; and German firm, Atlas Elektronik, with its Seahake Mod 4. It is understood that Russian and Japanese OEMs and Swedish company, Saab, were also sent RFIs. However, the Japanese did not respond; the Russian torpedo does not meet the Indian Navy’s specifications; nor does Saab’s, which is driven by a combustion engine while the navy wants an electrically driven torpedo.
The heavyweight torpedo is a submarine’s weapon of choice for sinking warships and submarines, which it typically engages from 50-100 kilometres away. Fired from a torpedo tube, it is driven through the water by a motor powered by electric batteries. It is guided towards the target by signals conveyed through a wire that unspools behind it. Approaching the target, the torpedo switches to “active guidance” using on-board sonar. When it slams into the target, an explosive charge detonates, creating an underwater hole that often causes catastrophic flooding, sinking the target vessel.
Besides torpedoes, submarines also carry anti-ship missiles (ASMs) like the Kalvari’s SM39 Exocet missile. ASMs are fired through the same tubes as torpedoes, and they emerge from the water and fly, skimming the sea, towards their target. But ASMs can be intercepted, and they are less lethal since they strike above the waterline.
The navy’s torpedo deficit has arisen due to the blacklisting of Italian conglomerate Finmeccanica, after allegations emerged in 2012 of bribery in the sale of twelve AW-101 helicopters to India by a Finmeccanica subsidiary, AgustaWestland. The defence ministry, on August 26, 2014, banned all new contracts with Finmeccanica group companies, including WASS, which had been chosen to supply 98 Black Shark torpedoes to India for the Scorpene fleet.
Global torpedo manufacturers believe India could be their largest customer. Although the current procurement is for only 100-plus torpedoes, industry experts say the navy actually requires 400-600 torpedoes. These are needed to arm six Scorpenes currently being rolled out, six Project 75-I submarines that are on the anvil, and a planned fleet of up to ten nuclear submarines.
With the cost of a heavyweight torpedo hovering around $2-3 million apiece, that represents a business opportunity of $800 million to $1.8 billion – a mouth-watering prospect for torpedo makers.
If the cost of the torpedoes the navy is currently buying tops Rs 2,000 crore ($311 million), the OEM will incur a 30 per cent offset liability. This would involve ploughing back 30 per cent of the contract value into Indian defence production. Since each torpedo costs an estimated $2-3 million, a 100-plus-torpedo order would be on the offset threshold.
Industry sources say buying torpedoes piecemeal – initially for the Kalvari-class, then for Project 75-I, and separately for the nuclear boats – would disadvantage India. Instead, a single order that combines India’s torpedo requirements would result in cheaper prices through economies of scale; and also create a compelling industrial logic for transferring torpedo production to India.

The defence ministry has issued a secret Request for Information (RFI) to global torpedo firms, for supplying over 100 heavyweight torpedoes for the Indian Navy’s Scorpene submarines, the first of which – INSKalvari – was commissioned on Thursday.
Prospective vendors are unwilling to speak, since they have signed a non-disclosure agreement. However three sources in the defence ministry and industry have verified this development.
While the torpedo RFI was issued in August and replies received in November from at least three global “original equipment manufacturers” (OEMs), a long wait lies ahead before the new torpedoes become available to arm the Kalvari and five more submarines that will follow it into service. The defence ministry’s Defence Procurement Procedure of 2016 allows 114 weeks (two years and three months) for concluding a contract, in practice an over-ambitious target. After the contract, manufacture and delivery would take another 2-3 years.
Until then, the navy’s six Kalvari-class boats (as the navy refers to submarines) will share 64 obsolescent SUT torpedoes with four HDW Shishumar-class vessels. This is woefully inadequate if the submarine fleet has to fight a war.
Further, there are question marks over the efficacy of the SUT torpedo, even though German OEM, Atlas Elektronik, was contracted in July 2013 to upgrade 64 SUT torpedoes and extend their service life by 15 years.
Business Standard learns the navy’s new torpedo RFI went out to 5-6 torpedo OEMs, but will boil down to a contest between French OEM, Naval Group, which is offering its F-21 torpedo; and German firm, Atlas Elektronik, with its Seahake Mod 4. It is understood that Russian and Japanese OEMs and Swedish company, Saab, were also sent RFIs. However, the Japanese did not respond; the Russian torpedo does not meet the Indian Navy’s specifications; nor does Saab’s, which is driven by a combustion engine while the navy wants an electrically driven torpedo.
The heavyweight torpedo is a submarine’s weapon of choice for sinking warships and submarines, which it typically engages from 50-100 kilometres away. Fired from a torpedo tube, it is driven through the water by a motor powered by electric batteries. It is guided towards the target by signals conveyed through a wire that unspools behind it. Approaching the target, the torpedo switches to “active guidance” using on-board sonar. When it slams into the target, an explosive charge detonates, creating an underwater hole that often causes catastrophic flooding, sinking the target vessel.
Besides torpedoes, submarines also carry anti-ship missiles (ASMs) like the Kalvari’s SM39 Exocet missile. ASMs are fired through the same tubes as torpedoes, and they emerge from the water and fly, skimming the sea, towards their target. But ASMs can be intercepted, and they are less lethal since they strike above the waterline.
The navy’s torpedo deficit has arisen due to the blacklisting of Italian conglomerate Finmeccanica, after allegations emerged in 2012 of bribery in the sale of twelve AW-101 helicopters to India by a Finmeccanica subsidiary, AgustaWestland. The defence ministry, on August 26, 2014, banned all new contracts with Finmeccanica group companies, including WASS, which had been chosen to supply 98 Black Shark torpedoes to India for the Scorpene fleet.
Global torpedo manufacturers believe India could be their largest customer. Although the current procurement is for only 100-plus torpedoes, industry experts say the navy actually requires 400-600 torpedoes. These are needed to arm six Scorpenes currently being rolled out, six Project 75-I submarines that are on the anvil, and a planned fleet of up to ten nuclear submarines.
With the cost of a heavyweight torpedo hovering around $2-3 million apiece, that represents a business opportunity of $800 million to $1.8 billion – a mouth-watering prospect for torpedo makers.
If the cost of the torpedoes the navy is currently buying tops Rs 2,000 crore ($311 million), the OEM will incur a 30 per cent offset liability. This would involve ploughing back 30 per cent of the contract value into Indian defence production. Since each torpedo costs an estimated $2-3 million, a 100-plus-torpedo order would be on the offset threshold.
Industry sources say buying torpedoes piecemeal – initially for the Kalvari-class, then for Project 75-I, and separately for the nuclear boats – would disadvantage India. Instead, a single order that combines India’s torpedo requirements would result in cheaper prices through economies of scale; and also create a compelling industrial logic for transferring torpedo production to India.

Sigh this sounds really terrible 114 weeks +2-3 years wait ? What if a new, bigger Kargill war happens in next two years and Pakistan Agosta subs manage to escape Poseidons’ watch ? INS Kalvari might be at risk if it meets an ennemy submarine without fully reliable torpedoes.

This is totally out of subject but I am deeply convinced that Argentina would have crushed the Royal Navy if they had patiently waited for their full dotation of Exocets before attacking. Sometimes having the right weapon at the right time is everything ... especially at sea.

This is totally out of subject but I am deeply convinced that Argentina would have crushed the Royal Navy if they had patiently waited for their full dotation of Exocets before attacking. Sometimes having the right weapon at the right time is everything ... especially at sea.

Sigh this sounds really terrible 114 weeks +2-3 years wait ? What if a new, bigger Kargill war happens in next two years and Pakistan Agosta subs manage to escape Poseidons’ watch ? INS Kalvari might be at risk if it meets an ennemy submarine without fully reliable torpedoes.

This is totally out of subject but I am deeply convinced that Argentina would have crushed the Royal Navy if they had patiently waited for their full dotation of Exocets before attacking. Sometimes having the right weapon at the right time is everything ... especially at sea.

Click to expand...

Varunastra (a ship based heavy torpedo) is being modified to be fired from submarines - this is the reason we are not buying Black Shark torpedoes yet.
A Kargil like war needs planning with visible movement on ground. We have faith in our military intelligence and millitary planners.

Sigh this sounds really terrible 114 weeks +2-3 years wait ? What if a new, bigger Kargill war happens in next two years and Pakistan Agosta subs manage to escape Poseidons’ watch ? INS Kalvari might be at risk if it meets an ennemy submarine without fully reliable torpedoes.

This is totally out of subject but I am deeply convinced that Argentina would have crushed the Royal Navy if they had patiently waited for their full dotation of Exocets before attacking. Sometimes having the right weapon at the right time is everything ... especially at sea.

Click to expand...

We have our own set of other submarines. Kalvari is not the only submarine with us. War may happen or may not, but the mistake was in not developing the torpedo in the first place. No point in covering up the error by importing.

Varunastra (a ship based heavy torpedo) is being modified to be fired from submarines - this is the reason we are not buying Black Shark torpedoes yet.
A Kargil like war needs planning with visible movement on ground. We have faith in our military intelligence and millitary planners.

Click to expand...

Well, Varunastra is a DRDO project, right ? Let’s hope for you they can deliver a modified Varunastra faster than their phosphoric acid fuel cell-powered AIP modules .